> We know from basic economic theory that there are manufacturers who would either ramp up production or go into production if the demand increased.
I'd be hesitant to use Economics 101 theories as a way to model the real world. While they are intuitive theories there is a reason they are 101 theories and even "expert" economists are often wrong. :)
These lines of thought are often similar to how people point to evolutionary reasoning because of how intuitively the "survival of the fittest" explanation comes into play (esp. wrt the capitalist society we live in).
That’s like saying we shouldn’t use the theory of gravity to explain why objects drop because it doesn’t hold at the speed of light. Well, it’s a fundamental theory for a reason, and it holds up a whole lot of the time in practice. You don’t need quantum physics to know which direction your phone will go when you let it go.
But in any case, even tossing that basic fundamental economic theory aside, what about the rest of my comment? Is it not true that we would have more masks in production today if we started producing them in January?
If there was enough additional demand, you bet there would be more production. Let’s say someone in January is suddenly willing to write a 10 billion dollar check for 100,000 masks. Not one additional mask would be produced before March? Because people are scrambling to procure masks now. And additional masks are being produced and even donated.
I'd be hesitant to use Economics 101 theories as a way to model the real world. While they are intuitive theories there is a reason they are 101 theories and even "expert" economists are often wrong. :)
These lines of thought are often similar to how people point to evolutionary reasoning because of how intuitively the "survival of the fittest" explanation comes into play (esp. wrt the capitalist society we live in).